Archives by date

The federal government is exerting unprecedented power over the people. So what do we do now? What can we do to stop this federal supremacy from making us a federal kingdom? REAL SOLUTIONS are available. We must simply get …… read and listen to more here.

John Roberts has the black robes, and the interpretive gifts, too. In the matter of the so-called Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court ruled that the law must not say what it in fact does say because it would be better if it were not to say what it says and were to say something else instead. In the matter of same-sex marriage, the Supreme Court rules that the law must say what it does not say because it would be better if it were to say what it does not say instead of what it says. Which is to say, the Supreme Court has firmly established that it does not matter what the law says or does not say — what matters is what they want.

That texts may be imaginatively interpreted to any end is not news — “The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose,” as William Shakespeare observed in The Merchant of Venice. The legendary constitutional scholar Barack Obama failed to notice, until the day before yesterday, that the Constitution mandates the legalization of homosexual marriage from sea to shining sea, but, to be fair, that is an ……. read more here.by KEVIN D. WILLIAMSON

The Supreme of the United States has just made two of the most egregious rulings in the history of nation. On last Thursday, their decision was announced that defended Obamacare, once again. On last Friday, the level of arrogance and pride reached new high mark as they literally defied the Biblical definition of marriage by imposing same-sex “marriage” upon the entire nation.

Barely in office for six months, and issuing only an opinion on the same-sex “marriage” SCOTUS decision, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has scheduled a swanky fundraiser on the outskirts of Houston’s River Oaks community. The soiree is scheduled for Tuesday, June 30.

Top ticket? $25,000.

Paxton is not up for reelection until 2018. Apparently, he’s following the pattern of his predecessor, Gov. Greg Abbott. Abbott never faced a primary opponent the entire time he held the office. As a result, by the time it was his turn to sleep in the Governor’s Mansion, he’d piled up $40 million in campaign donations.

Paxton is off and running in courting the plutocracy. The question then becomes, how much courage will he show after promising so much during his campaign?

Before beginning condemnation proceedings on land that could be the site of a new high school, Conroe ISD had to sue for access to the property.

According to the petition for temporary injunction filed with Harris County Court-at-Law 4, CISD sued the landowners in December 2014 after repeated attempts to negotiate with the landowners for access to the property to perform a land survey and a Phase 1 environmental impact study.

The court ruled partly in favor of the district and partly in favor of the landowners. The district was allowed access to the property in March 2015 but denied the ……… read more here.

Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards says her organization has no immediate plans to build more abortion clinics in Texas, where only eight abortion facilities may remain if strict new regulations take effect from July 1.

Richards said Saturday that even if the organization built additional clinics that meet new standards upheld this month by a federal appeals court, finding doctors who have hospital admitting ……. read more here.

Share this:

There are truly two sides to me. I’ve always been a fairly dichotomous person; a contrarian, if you will. I remember in third grade refusing to say the Pledge of Allegiance because I didn’t understand why I should pledge loyalty to something I didn’t fully grasp at eight years old. I remember, that same year, casting a paper vote for Jimmy Carter (I drew a peanut on my ballot) because everyone else was voting for Reagan. I was obsessed with Margaret Thatcher, Ayn Rand, and also John Waters in high school. So, I guess you could say, as an immature person, I was a liberal. As I grew and understood, I became the conservative I am proud to be.

This past week, with the Supreme Court casting its imprimatur upon yet another social issue– gay marriage (that, in my opinion, was being handled as a STATE/legislative matter, and as more and more people became accepting of it, would’ve been resolved in disparate states), social conservatives, who are hanging on by a proverbial thread in America today, had the death knell dropped on their religious freedom and freedom of expression.

Nothing made that more clear to me than Left’s reaction (arrogant jubilation) to what I feel is a gross, Roe v. Wade-style overreach of the court’s purview.

The day the Supreme Court, in typical 5-4 fashion, allowed same-sex marriage in all 50 states, a little-known local paper called the PennLive/The Patriot-News in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, put themselves on the map when they arbitrarily decided to ban any mention on their Op-Ed pages of anything disparaging gay marriage. In essence, they were censoring differing views on the issue.

Now, notwithstanding the obvious contradictions with the First Amendment rights of the community, this tiny paper decided they were going to silence a significant portion of their readership who offered a differing opinion from the editorial board—BECAUSE THEY COULD. The press knows they won’t be censored. But here’s the rub: YOU will be censored if the press deems you “subversive” or “offensive”. Subversive to the never-ending rush to a liberal utopian fantasy and offensive to what the protected classes liberals in America have deemed so worthy. And that’s what should scare you.

See more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/27/newspaper-faces-firestorm-after-attempted-crack-down-on-anti-gay-marriage-op/

This is where, not in substance, but in dichotomy, I find myself torn.

I loathe the Left. I loathe every totalitarian, conformist, hipster, fascist, patchouli-clad, ironic-bearded, Urban Outfitters vomited-upon incarnation they take. I think the Left is relentless in its pursuit of total control (mind, body, and soul) and I only wish the Right could be as hardcore vigilant (but, you see, most conservatives have jobs and can’t sit around all day fomenting rage against THE MAN). Therefore, what is leftist thought and leftist deed has become action and policy—i.e., the status quo. I have to begrudgingly respect them for that—for their ability to shove their assbackwards agenda onto the media and the rest of us. But that doesn’t make it right.

However.

I don’t think people choose to be gay. If so, that would be a difficult choice for many people. I think people love who they love, and God bless them for it. As long as you’re not hurting anyone, who am I to judge?

That said: for 5,000 years we have had an institution of marriage, regardless of what the Left chooses to believe, that was instilled in the Bible and which the Left, as much as they claim the institution as misogynist, backwards, and patriarchal still seem to want to join. (Side-note: I am not saying all gay people are leftists—they are not. Many are conservatives who are derided in their communities for going against the radical grain, and good for them. But gay activists, by and large, are leftist.)

When you cheapen the word “marriage” to mean whatever society in 2015 wants it to mean, you cheapen the institution. As we’ve already seen in this country and others, polygamy and plural marriage have already been pushed—after all, if a man can marry a man, why can’t I marry two men? Or a man and my cat? Etc.

I have zero problem with civil commitment ceremonies and for conferring inheritance/wealth benefits onto same-sex couples. None. But it’s not marriage.

A leftist reading this essay might guffaw at my presumption, but it’s not just me. It is happening. Former Senator Rick Santorum has been endlessly mocked for his slippery-slope observations about gay marriage leading to God knows what, but he’s been proven correct.

There are a plethora of articles backing up this theory, but time is short.

What breaks my heart about this Supreme Court ruling is that states and, as we will soon see, religious (read: Christian) organizations will be given short shrift when it comes to the First Amendment if the hyper-politically correct government brownshirts have their way. And I have no doubt they will.

Free speech, religious freedom, states’ rights, and individual expression are under assault now more than ever. And just you wait to see the societal fallout from all of this rewriting of natural law. It’s coming.

If you choose to disagree, how quickly will the iron fist fall upon you?

Share this:

The criminal law is the most potent “lever through which government brings power to bear on the individual citizen.” Not only can a criminal conviction lead to imprisonment and the loss of other rights, including the right to vote, it forever brands those who are convicted as criminals — a stigma that can be difficult, if not impossible, to overcome. Because of these serious consequences, the power to define crimes and to prosecute and jail people for committing them must be exercised with utmost care. Unfortunately, for all its virtues, the criminal justice system does not always exercise the care that it should.

This essay focuses on three vital areas of concern: overcriminalization, harsh mandatory minimum sentences, and the demise of jury trials. These problems pervade our criminal justice system at large, but there are practical ways to ………… read more here.